Enron Mail

From:laruzow@concentric.net
To:lslade@modrall.com
Subject:Re: Meeting with Zaman - April 17th
Cc:bill.cordes@enron.com, drew.fossum@enron.com, james.derrick@enron.com,johnny.mcgee@enron.com, louis.soldano@enron.com, michael.moran@enron.com, michel.nelson@enron.com, phil.lowry@enron.com, stanley.horton@enron.com, steven.harris@enron.com, tim.aro
Bcc:bill.cordes@enron.com, drew.fossum@enron.com, james.derrick@enron.com,johnny.mcgee@enron.com, louis.soldano@enron.com, michael.moran@enron.com, michel.nelson@enron.com, phil.lowry@enron.com, stanley.horton@enron.com, steven.harris@enron.com, tim.aro
Date:Thu, 20 Apr 2000 04:39:00 -0700 (PDT)

Lynn:

I think there is wisdom in seeking to separate money from terms at this
point. If TW and TNN reach an agreement on money. Then, in some sense, TNN
will be counting on this money and there should be some pressure to reach a
final agreement so that the money can be paid. This may cause some
flexibility on terms. If we are trying to negotiate both money and terms at
the same time, the sovereignty zealots can argue, "they (TW) haven't even
agreed to a "fair" consideration, and now they want to take our sovereignty."

It has been said that "when money goes out the door, love goes out the
window." Perhaps the converse is true.

A final thought is that I am aware of the Standing Rock scenario where an
agreement on consideration was reached first and then the deal fell apart on
the question of terms. While my knowledge of all the details is not complete,
it is my understanding that in that case, (unlike the present situation), it
was not made crystal clear to TNN that the Standing Rock terms still needed
negotiation. Moreover, I am not sure that in Standing Rock you had the
participation of a TNN Task Force that included Navajo Nation Council
Committee Chairs (who should furnish the impetus for completing a deal and
getting the money once consideration is agreed on.)

LAR

I think there is wisdom in seeking to separate

Lynn Slade wrote: ** Proprietary **

Louie:? I think the letter to Mr. Trujillo is excellent, particularly as it
follows on the strategy suggested by Zaman.? It signals that there is no
sense in talking unless we can resolve compensation issues, but suggests
there will be other issues we need to discuss.? If we want to emphasize that
we cannot acquiesce in their terms and conditions, we could insert to the
second sentence in the final paragraph of the letter: "It would seem best to
schedule a meeting with the entire Task Force to discuss consideration and
other key issues once the Nation has responded to this portion of
Transwestern's offer."? Please raise any other questions you may have.? Lynn

<Louis.Soldano@enron.com< 04/18/00 04:42PM <<<
Please see the attached.

(See attached file: status17.doc)

(See attached file: DAS02.doc)